tv The Cycle MSNBC September 26, 2013 3:00pm-4:00pm EDT
ti tired. when you're going well and swinging the bat well, guys aren't tired. when you don't score and you're losing, that word comes up a lot. to me, it's an excuse. you got to find a way. that's your job. >> the truth from joe girardi. of course, he was talking about the new york yan kekees. it also applies to congress. you have to find a way. that's your job. trying to live up to that, though, the senate's powering through with the house stopgap bill to keep the government running. but today they stripped the portion that defunds obama care, which means after friday's final vote, it's back to it the house, and if it fails, which is likely, there's talk of a possible one-week cr. yes, the washington gridlock is that dysfunctional. the fiscal year ends monday, and we hit the debt ceiling 17 days later. this is where both sides are really digging in their heels. so get your life vest ready as washington tries to stay afloat. while you're at it, grab a snorkel for president obama because he's under water as well. at least according to the new
cbs "new york times" poll. his overall job approval rating has sunk to 43%, an 18-month low. here's more numbers on presidential approval. 41% on the economy, 40% on health care, 35% on handling the budget deficit. foreign policy isn't any better either with a 39% approval on leading u.s. relations with iran. 37% on handling the syria crisis. we have discovered from both sides of capitol hill, kristen welker at the white house, luke russert on the hill. kristen, let's start with you. give us the highlights. >> hey, abby. that's right. president obama slamming congressional republicans for threat tong shut down the government over defunding his health care law. he's also on a bit of an explaining campaign. of course, polls show that a majority of americans still don't really understand the health care law. it's not all that popular. but when you break it down to
its individual pieces, it gets a whole lot more popular. so the president today trying to build up public support for his health care law as he pressures congressional republicans and he did so by highlighting a couple of key facts. one, the fact that young adults can stay on their parents' plans until they're 26 years old. insurance companies can't deny people coverage for pre-existing conditioning and also have to coffer things like prescription drug costs. the president using the example of maryland, to say that a 25-year-old living there who makes about $25,000 would pay less than $80 for health care every month. take a listen to a little more of what president obama had to say today. >> a few years from now when people are using this to get coverage and everybody's feeling pretty good about all the choices and competition they've got, there are going to be a whole bunch of folks who say, yeah, no, i always thought this provision was excellent. i voted for that thing.
you watch. it will not be called obama care. >> but of course house speaker john boehner today saying that he's not going to just accept what the senate passes, if they do, in fact, pass that clean continuing resolution. republicans pointing to the fact that some small businesses feel as though their costs are going to go up. there are some glitches with implementation. we learned eed about a new one today. but the president and his administration adamant about the fact the president is going to sign a bill that's going to defund obama care. they're also not going to negotiate over the debt limit. it seems likely the republicans are going to use the debt limit to scale back the president's health care law. seems like where the new frontier of this fight will take place. >> and luke, how is all of this playing out on the hill? >> well, abby, what kristen touched on there, which is very important, i asked speaker boehner today whether or not the house gop would accept a clean
government funding bill from the senate. he said, i don't see that happening. that's very significant because we get into the issue of timing now. boehner also said that he doesn't want the government to shut down, but we're five days away. if the senate sends something over to the house come friday, the house gets it saturday, it's unknown what the house is going to attach on to that bill to fund the government. it could be something like getting rid of a tax on medical devices. could be something like cutting health care benefits for congressional staffers. could be something like delaying the implementation of the president's health care law for a year. whatever they attach to a clean bill over from the senate implies there will be some sort of delay unless the senate can work on it in a very quick pace. we also don't know if those folks in the senate, the self-proclaimed whacko birds, like ted cruz and mike lee, would want to hold something like that up. there's a lot of uncertainty right now on capitol hill. it's starting to reverberate around washington. nobody knows it how this is going to end from where we stand right now.
you said there could be a one-week cr. possibly you could have funding for a week. some folks in the house say we don't like that. we have to move past it or at least tie it into the debt limit. the house is going to vote on a debt limit issue come this weekend. that's very important because what the leadership in the house is trying to do is stick every gop goody there is, and you see that in this bill, to try and get folks to be okay with avoiding a government shutdown. that is the game plan. however, as we know in the house gop, nothing is certain until it's like stevie wonder said, toure's boy, signed, sealed, and delivered. until it's signed, sealed, and delivered, uncertainty reigns on capitol hill. >> that's one thing we know. luke russert, kristen welker, thank you both. for more, we go to our politics insider. josh, when you look at the economy, health care, deaf fit, federal budget, more americans
disapprove ever -- i guess it's been two years. two-thirds of americans saying we're on the wrong track, which is the highest number since 2012. are people -- has the president lost the american people? have they stopped listening? >> i think it's been a difficult summer for him. i think the syria trajectory made him look a little lost on foreign policy. i think on domestic policy with these issues with the budget and obama care implementation it looks like things are not working as well as they're supposed to. i think the public is blaming both the president and congress for that. congress, of course, also has terrible numbers. it's not like the president is alone in this regard. i think the one thing that's really propping up the president right now politically is that house republicans are shooting themselves in the foot so much politically looking even more lost than he is. so i think even though his numbers have declined, he's still in a position of relative strength. >> land of the blind, right? >> you heard it there in the reporting from the hill. the republicans looking like
they want to get very close here to shutting down the government. they can't tell you exactly why. if the government shuts down, i think the biggest problem, and you can't really poll this in advance. you have to see what goes down. but they won't be able to say why we have shut the government down. if it's just that they don't like obama care, obviously people have heard about that for a while and it's been litigated, as senator mccain was saying. the other thought i'd like to get your reaction to is ted cruz doesn't like obama care. fine. i have no problem with that. >> he doesn't? >> what i have a problem with is the fact that he really proved himself to be a liar this week. i think that's a very important part of this pushback. he lied about the parliamentary procedure. he lied about what he was doing. he lied about his plans. he said a vote for cloture was a vote for obama care. then we have a 100-0 vote. "the new york times" reporting today a lot of confusion among republicans and the activist base he appealed to because they don't understand the end game. they thought that he was actually holding a filibuster, which is a factual matter as a
matter of how the senate works. it wasn't a filibuster. i think viewers know that, obviously, from our reporting. so what do you make of all of this, the dishonesty with which he waves this campaign? >> i think there's two things. what do republicans want in exchange for not shutting down the government? they clearly want something. it's just different republicans want different things. what john boehner and eric cantor -- their primary goal was maintaining the spending cuts from sequestration. looks like they're going to get that goal, even if a clean cr comes back from the senate. the house will have gotten its way on spending levels. and then what people like ted cruz want is they want obama care defunded. his strategy wasn't -- >> but i got to interrupt you. i appreciate your point that there are some goals there. i'm in the implying that sequester isn't on the table. what about specifically the dishonesty with which he waged the campaign? >> i think ted cruz's campaign wasn't quite dishonest in the way that if 40 other senate republicans were willing to line
up and vote on cloture, that will come tomorrow. there's two, one to open debate and one to cut off debate. ted cruz never intended to vote no on wednesday. we'll see how many republicans will join him. obviously, it's not going to be close to 40. >> i'm sorry. i don't usually interrupt you this much. just on the point, though, he did say he was filibustering and that was false. >> i think ted cruz would be happy to conduct a real filibuster if he could get 40 other republicans to join him in preventing the continuing resolution. >> i'd be happy to call it a filibuster if it was one. i think the details matter. but go on. >> the reason ted cruz's plan can't work is republicans are not willing to engage in a complete scorched earth strategy over obama care for a variety of reasons. it would be a political disaster for therm. it would be negative for the economy to have a prolonged government shutdown. obviously the president is not going to agree to end the government shutdown by defunding obama care.
on the narrow point that if republicans were to fully resist on all of these issues and bring government to a screeching halt for a period of months, they have the power by virtue of controlling one house of congress and having more than 40 seats in the senate to break everything. and this more broadly is the republican strategy on the debt ceiling. they're saying we control one house of congress. this gives us leverage. we can threatn to blow up the economy in economy. we can demand whatever set of things we're going to demand. the problem with the strategy is that it is irresponsible and that it's politically unsustainable for the republican party, but it's not technically impossible for republicans to leverage their control of a portion of congress to force -- to force some of their policy agenda. >> josh, as a writer, one of the things i love about my man ari is he demands our language actually means the thing it says it means. it was actually not a
filibuster. the shutdown is like that, the government won't actually shutdown. lots of things the government does will continue, including the implementation of obama care. let me switch to chris matthews. got a new book coming out. he says, we need leaders able to balance large purpose with equally large awareness of the electorate. what message the voters have sent in a worthy context. this goes for those who have won but especially for those who haven't. it seems that part of the problem here is that the republican party lost in 2012 and yet they continue to fight against that. >> right. and that's what john mccain was trying to explain to ted cruz yesterday. he gave a speech on the senate floor just after noon, just after cruz had been speaking for 21 hours. he said almost like he was explaining to a child, you know, in a democracy, you know, typically what happens is the majority determines what legislation will pass. he was explaining, you know, why republicans lost on obama care. it wasn't because they didn't fight hard enough. it's because they fought and lost because they were in the
minority in congress. they fought elections over it. they lost those too. i think that's an electoral reality ted cruz and others haven't realized. they can use what vestiges of power they have to press these issues, but the more they do that, the more they're going to alienate parts of the electorate. that's why other parts of the republican party, including john boehner and a lot of the governors like chris christie and scott walker, have been pushing back on the idea that republicans should be single mindedly trying to defund obama care. they need to move on to other things they might be able to build an electoral majority around. >> well, and the point the president has been making as well is as they're trying to use that leverage that they have, they're also changing the constitutional balance of powers that was established. and i would think they should look down the road to a time when the democrats might be in a minority and use that leverage in a similar way. moving on past the government shutdown fight, i have a list here, josh, of the debt ceiling
demands that the republicans have laid out as obtained by the national review. we've got, of course, the one-year obama care delay. we have tax reform, keystone pipeline, of course, blocking net neutrality. pretty much every quote/unquote jobs bill we have passed this year and last, aka corporate giveaways, means testing medicare, cfpb changes, tort reform, et cetera, et cetera, et cetera. i feel like they're leaving something off this list. jay carney, you got any ideas? >> a birther bill to attach to it. >> the birther bill. that's what they forgot. i don't know how they could have overlooked questioning the president's place of birth in addition to everything else that they've ever wanted. i mean, this isn't serious, is it? >> no, it's not. it's the romney economic agenda. it's basically saying agree to implement the economic agenda that we would have had if we had
won the last election. in exchange for that, we'll cause the government not to default on its debt. it's not a serious offer. what struck me most about it is for the last couple of years, republicans have stuck to making budgetary demands. at least there was a semi coherent story behind this. in exchange for raising the debt limit, we'll require measures that reduce future deficits. that's the deal they got in 2011. the deal they got in 2013 was that the senate would have to pass a budget. so that didn't actually force further deficit reduction, but at least it was about the budget. now they're asking for things like net neutrality, which have nothing whatsoever to do with the size of the federal debt or deficit. so republicans are clearly admitting now that really they just see the debt limit as a vehicle to make unrelated policy demands rather than a vehicle to determine the trajectory of the nation -- >> as a vehicle apparently to get every single thing they want according to this document. >> they would hope. >> well, josh, when you come on "the cycle," you have to be
willing to play ball. before we go, we must look at how you spent part of the last week. you appeared on "up" with steve kornacki. you took center stage in his game show segment up against the clock. >> krystal. >> one. >> one is correct. >> josh? >> dennis. >> josh. >> bob gates. >> josh. >> george w. bush. >> josh. >> dan malloy. >> that's incorrect. the question is still on the floor with three, two, one -- krystal. >> martin o'malley. >> that's correct. >> krystal? >> the u.k. >> correct. >> krystal? >> grenada. >> krystal, 1200. josh, 500. evan, 800. hillary clinton said this week
which of the state's elected officials, quote, has just been entered into the guinness world book of records as the luckiest politician? josh. >> pat quinn. >> that's correct. that moves you into a tie with evan for second place. unfortunately, not enough to catch the once and still champion krystal ball. you are the winner of today's -- what are we calling it again? up against the clock. >> in fairness, i took that way too seriously. >> i love how excited krystal gets with the woo-woo. >> you got to play to win. >> josh, the winner of that gets an automatic invitation to "the cycle." as you and perry bacon jr. have proved over the last few weeks, we take those who come in first and dead last. >> i appreciate the pity in that. i'll take what i can get. >> you're a good sport. thanks as always for coming on. all right. tomorrow krystal will celebrate her big win in the guest spot. we may even hear from mr. kornacki himself. as for today, we'll be back with ceo pay and the new cycle up
♪ [ male announcer ] bob's heart attack didn't come with a warning. today his doctor has him on a bayer aspirin regimen to help reduce the risk of another one. if you've had a heart attack, be sure to talk to your doctor before you begin an aspirin regimen. she was a picky eater. well now i'm her dietitian... ...and last year, she wasn't eating so well. so i recommended boost complete nutritional drink to help her get the nutrition she was missing. and now she drinks it every day. well, it tastes great! [ male announcer ] boost drink has 26 essential vitamins and minerals, including calcium and vitamin d to support strong bones, and 10 grams of protein to help maintain muscle. and now boost comes in two delicious, new bars.
now for a spin cycle that might get a little heavy. yesterday on this show and many others you saw chilling footage of the navy yard shooter moving through the halls, shotgun in hand. you're not seeing that video now because i asked my producer not to show it again. i said, what is the media's responsibility here? that question is also the part of the debate around the tragic 911 calls out of sandy hook. yesterday a freedom of information panel ordered newtown police to release them, a ruling that's being appealed.
but whatever that body decides, do we as media have to air them? do we as media have to say the names of these killers over and over? because we know as psychologists have said on this show, this is what these deviant folks they want. they want to join that sort of infamous roll call of folks from aurora to newtown to gabby giffords in arizona, on and on and on. they want to join that. we as media are partly giving into that and giving them that notoriety that they want. and it becomes almost like sort of shooter porn or killer porn. we are showing this over and over and over, saying their name over and over, pictures over and over. >> but what's the alternative, though? >> we don't have to say their name. we can call them the shooter. it can be about newtown rather than saying that individual's name over and over and over and giving him that little bit of notoriety and fame. >> let me asking -- >> that he wants. hold on. there's media responsibility to give valuable information, which it was valuable on that day it
happened. then there's a point at which we're giving stuff we just know is sticky. what is the value of seeing this person run through empty halls? what is the value of saying his name and seeing him smiling here and there? >> is it's one thing if you're reporting the news and that's that person's name. i wanted to ask you guys if you remember the names of any of the recent past shooters, aurora or virginia tech? i remember what their faces look like, but i don't remember their names necessarily off the top of my head. i guarantee there are many other people who reported those stories day in and day out who don't remember the name. >> i think a lot of folks do remember the names though. jared loughner was one. to me the flip side is this. i'm very conflicted on this topic. i mean, and to your point, toure, some of the people who commit these acts are insane. some of them want the notoriety. some of them are trying to make a political statement. our coverage gives them the opportunity through their horrible acts to make the statement that they're trying to make. the flip side of that is think
progress put up a chart that shows the interest in the navy yard shootings is declining. interest in miley cyrus is rising. it dropped off precipitously, like immediately. so as a result, you know, and i don't know if it's because we're becoming numb because these shootings happen so frequently or what it is exactly that's going on, but as a result, there isn't really a conversation going on about what we could change in terms of our gun laws, in terms of mental health, in terms of anything you might think would be legitimate. so the flip side, to me, is when you do have a hook like new video coming out that is going to reenga-engage the public, ist their responsibility to show that as the next part of furthering that debate? >> i don't know. i don't believe we learned anything from seeing him run through these empty hallways. >> but my point is it's not necessarily learning something but again bringing attention to it because it's so easy in the news cycle to just move on.
people have sadly, largely moved on. >> what i want to do within this discussion as media folks is i want to continue to have that, right. if we want to bring up gun control, talk about mental health, those sort of things, let's do that. but let's disappear the person who's the perpetrator of this and not let that man, usually a man, become famous and become sort of, you know -- there's a book in our office right now by charles manson. why should his name be so famous for 40 years? we should disappear him. as media folks, we don't have to say these things. part of why this discussion happened today is we showed the video yesterday. i said to the producer, i will do that read, but i'm going to say the shooter. i'm not going to say his name. he said, then, let's let abby do it. i said, that's how i'm going to do the story. when that comes up, i'm going to say, the shooter. we can talk about the navy yard and make the navy yard famous and not him. >> but there's a bigger conversation. you were getting to this point of what is the responsibility of the media? what should we release and what
should we refrain from releasing? does it actually add value to the conversation? does it help us solve anything? does it help people better understand the situation? it reminds me of the 911 call from the elementary school in atlanta. we can play a clip of it quick to remind people. >> it's going to be all right, sweetheart. i just want you to know i love you, though, okay? i'm proud of you. don't worry about it. we all go through something in life. >> that call was meaningful for a lot of people and was a hero. i think what toure is speaking to is an important point, which is that we don't want the material, whether spread by the media or by social media, by citizens, we don't want that material to be used in an after life to glorify the very perpetrator of some terrible crime or terrorism, mass murder. that's an important line that i think you're speaking to. how do you draw that line? as a society, though, it's hard to draw that line until we
gather a lot of information, right. under federal law, there is a presumption of disclosure about most government activities. there are exceptions to that like national security, but if something happens at the navy yard, and in many cases 911 calls which are police, state, or federal law, there's a presumption that stuff will be released unless it's going to interfere with an ongoing investigation. >> but the question s do we have to air it or -- >> i'm drilling down on that. the fact it's open and available doesn't mean it should all be covered one way. the concern i have, particularly thinking about these issues from having litigated first amendment where you don't trust the government -- i mean, the first amendment is a very anti-government rule. congress shall make no law interfering with what we do with press, et cetera. the problem is sometimes we have to let that information or that video get out there and learn a lot more over time before we're sure about whether the perpetrator is, as you say, someone that should be disappear fd to some degree from our political conversation or srt point. in this case, it seems from what
we know this was not, you know, motivated terrorism. this was not a political attack. this is a very disturbed individual, an insane person. so we care less about that than if it's al qaeda, right, or the terrible attacks at the marathon where we needed a lot more video and information because we needed to help the country understand what the attack was. >> you make an excellent point. that day, the next day, we need to get those names out there. when we first put out the boston bombers' pictures, that was important. we have to find these individuals. we have their faces. we don't have their names. in that situation, the media and the public worked with police to help catch them. but now at this point, this shooting is, what, two weeks old? why are we showing this video? because we know folks will watch it. >> i also think we have to have humility about us making the judgment of the information that the public deserves to see and should see and can handle and what they can't handle. so to ari's point -- >> see, i don't know -- >> but i think to ari's point, this is part of what you were getting at anyway, you should
air on the side of disclosure when it is a tricky issue like this. and i do think that even though it is not, you know, talking about the issues at stake here, having something that the public is interested in and that's why it's on the air as a way to keep that conversation going is an important thing. >> i don't want to hide the details of the number of kids who get killed in newtown or how he got in the navy yard. but the person, i want disappear him. up next, is your boss worth 354 times your value? probably not. a new rule wall street is not exactly rallying around. a writer and a performer. ther,
i'm also a survivor of ovarian and uterine cancers. i even wrote a play about that. my symptoms were a pain in my abdomen and periods that were heavier and longer than usual for me. if you have symptoms that last two weeks or longer, be brave, go to the doctor. ovarian and uterine cancers are gynecologic cancers. symptoms are not the same for everyone. i got sick... and then i got better. some kind of...
this is... an alien species. reality check: a lot of 4g lte coverage maps don't really look like much at all. i see the aleutian islands. looks like a duck. it looks like... america... ish. that's a map. that's a map of the united states. check the map. verizon's 4g lte is the most reliable, and in more places than any other 4g network. trade in your old device and trade up to america's most reliable network. i've got the good one! i got verizon! that's powerful. verizon.
profiled trayvon martin, she did express doubts about his account of the night trayvon martin was killed. >> do you believe the story we have all heard from him? >> i'm conflicted on that. i believe the evidence, but this revelation in my life has really helped me to take the blinders off and start to see things differently. >> let me make sure i understand. you now doubt his innocence, at least the fact that he was acting in self-defense on the night that trayvon martin was killed? >> i think anyone would doubt that innocence because i don't know the person that i've been married to. >> zimmerman's wife stood by him throughout the trial. she is on probation for lying about their finances during his bond hearing, but she claims in her own words that he went on a, quote, victory tour after he was found not guilty of second-degree murder, leaving her behind. former president george h.w. bush served as a witness for a wedding over the weekend in maine, but this wasn't just any
wedding. it was between two women, long-time friends of the bushes. barbara was also among the guests. marriage equality was passed into law in maine last december. >> that's lovely. there's absolutely no news value to this next story. krystal, i'm sorry for demeaning the news cycle, but america has to see this. just run it. >> i'm sabrina rodriguez, we're in lodi today. i'm being joined by mickey the baboon. he's trying to cop a feel a little bit. we're going to be talking about the lodi great festival happening this weekend starting today. we'll learn more about why baboons love grapes. >> so that happened. >> that did happen. i think i'm going to take the high road, toure, and give you a check on wall street and what's happening there. stocks are reversing five days of losses. they're up modestly this afternoon. investors have their eyes off the street and towards the hill. people are cautiously optimistic about congress finding some way to avert this government
shutdown. well, as washington continues to debate whether to fund public workers, the obama administration is pushing new rules to patrol rising inequality for workers in the private sector, ie what you make versus what your boss does. that is hard to do on wall street, though, because inequality's actually a sign of success. what do i mean? ceos don't want to be paid equal to each other. in fact, the last time the government required companies to disclose executive compensation in '92, that competitive dynamic undermined the effort the clinton administration was basically trying to limit some excessive salaries through disclosure. it didn't really work. in fact, instead of shaming wall street, those salary pieces of information drove a type of bidding war. according to one study, it gave executives an enormous advantage, helping them push for above-average salaries regardless of their performance. so that brings us to a new rule being proposed by the s.e.c. it would require companies to release the ratio of ceo pay to
the average worker. ideally, that could press companies to do more for regular workers. the rule is based on the 2010 dodd frank law, which noted the skyrocketing salaries of ceos over the past decades. corporate lobbyists say the rule prioritizes a noneconomic goal, wage equality, over economic performance. well, let's figure this out. our next guest knows the battle. susan ox worked in both the clinton and obama treasury departments and was an adviser to t.a.r.p. thanks for being here. >> great to be here. >> why would this rule now work better than last time? >> well, it's important to understand that it's hard to compare apples to apples among companies a lot of times. you can see right now companies have to disclose the top five executives' total compensation in their annual report. the problem is it's hard to compare how does that ceo look towards another ceo in a
different industry. part of the idea that investors have been looking for is we want better ways to compare apples to apples. >> susan, ratios like earnings per share, return on equity, they're supposed to be indicators to wall street and investors of the financial health of the company. some of the criticism is that this new ratio doesn't actually mean anything. it's only intended to shame ceos and play into this anti-wall street sentiment. so what, if anything, would this ratio say about the actual financial state of the company? >> it's important to note two things, i would say. one, employee morale is really port for companies. i think understanding the disparity between a ceo's pay and the workers' pay is important for the cultural health of the company. also, this rule would apply to all companies in all sectors. one of the most reportedly overpaid ceos is of oracle, which obviously is not a financial company. so this is a widespread problem in corporate america right now. now, the challenge is shareholders don't actually have
a lot of power, even if they have this information. even if they were able to vote on it, which the s.e.c. had provided for in a provision in 2011, it's a nonbinding vote. it becomes a nice suggestion. >> in -- it's written why we have this ceo pay gap. he really blames all of us. he says, it starts with the ceos who get to set their own pay. it continues with the board who allow ceos to continue with that regardless of performance. and it continues with the workers who have been handcuffed. these packages are free of the counterveiling fours of the strong unions that used to be able to hold them down. why do you think ceos are getting paid so much? is krugman right? >> i think there's a little bit
of that sentiment. there is a collective complicity in the skyrocketing nature of the salaries. i really would put a lot of the blame on the boards. they are the ones who can actually change the compensation. there's a compensation committee. they vote on the ceo's pay. unfortunately, a lot of the boards we have right now, the chairman of the board is also the ceo of the company. and that dynamic is not creating enough independence for the board to be able to vote against the ceo's salary. >> well, i'm sure you saw these comments recently from the ceo of aig talking about the public outcry over bonuses that were paid out of bailout money. frankly an unbelievable statement. he said, it was intended to stir public anger to get everybody out there with their pitchforks and hangman nooses and all that, sort of like what we did in the deep south decades ago, and i think it was just as bad and just as wrong. i don't think you need me to opine on what an unbelievable
and awful statement that is. but this view that executives and that people in the financial services industry in particular are the victims. is that a pervasive view, or is that just this one guy? >> i do think there has been this feeling in the financial industry that they've been in this defensive crouch ever since the crisis in 2008. they reallyeel like they have been sort of beaten up and put upon. there are a lot of people who understand the dynamics and the public sentiment, but i think there's a disconnect between what they believe they are worth and what the rest of society thinks they're worth. >> i should quickly point out that this was coming from a man who just got a 24% pay raise to $13 million a year despite presiding over a year of declining sales. >> victim. >> that's right. >> and from aig. you oversaw t.a.r.p. or were an adviser with $700 billion. how much of was that to aig? >> it was about $80 billion. >> give or take $80 billion. he might want to dial it back a
little. susan, thanks for spending time with us on this important topic. up next, shopping with a heart. ♪ [ male announcer ] now, taking care of things at home is just a tap away. ♪ introducing at&t digital life... ♪ ...personalized home security and automation... [ lock clicks ] ...that lets you be closer to home. that's so cool.
[ male announcer ] get $100 in instant savings when you order digital life smart security. limited availability in select markets. ♪ humans. even when we cross our "ts" and dot our "i's", we still run into problems. that's why liberty mutual insurance offers accident forgiveness with our auto policies. if you qualify, your rates won't go up due to your first accident.
because making mistakes is only human, and so are we. we also offer new car replacement, so if you total your new car, we'll give you the money for a new one. call liberty mutual insurance at... and ask us all about our auto features, like guaranteed repairs, where if you get into an accident and use one of our certified repair shops, the repairs are guaranteed for life. so call... to talk with an insurance expert about everything that comes standard with our base auto policy. and if you switch, you could save up to $423. liberty mutual insurance -- responsibility. what's your policy? i want peacocks. peacocks? walking the grounds. in tuscany. [ man ] her parents didn't expect her dreams to be so ambitious. italy? oh, that's not good. [ man ] by exploring their options, they learned that instead of going to italy, they could use a home equity loan to renovate their yard and have a beautiful wedding right here while possibly increasing the value of their home.
you and roger could get married in our backyard. it's robert, dad. [ female announcer ] come in to find the right credit options for your needs. because when people talk, great things happen. look, let's just be honest. i like to shop, but there's a moment, usually a brief flicker in the afterglow of a little shopping spree or picking something that's really cute, where doubt creeps in and you wonder where your money is going and what exactly it is you're supporting. recently stories about the working conditions in china and bangladesh have forced me to take a harder look at the companies i buy from. the fact is, you don't always know. well, our next guests are taking the burden of research off the consumer, and they've created a market that allows you to see where your product is coming from, how it was made, and who you are supporting. just like wholefoods has inspired people to care about the origins of their foods, zady
is a platform aiming to change the way you think about shopping with the focus on the integrity of both the product and the producers. it's a great idea. we're joined now by the co-founders of zady.com. maxine, i want to start with you. what was the inspiration for you to want to create this site? >> well, we grew up in the era of fast fashion. we were consumers of fast fashion. >> tell us what fast fashion is. >> so fast fashion are those companies that are really pushing product, getting you to come in the store every week, every month to try to buy a new thing. that's what we had, you know, gotten used to. we would have a bad day. it wasn't going well. so we'd feel better, have a pick-me-up and walk home with a nice bag or shirt. we got tired of that. we had closets full of clothes and yet we felt we had nothing to wear. at the same time, you know, we were hearing about slave labor conditions in china and bangladesh, as you just mentioned. it felt really hard to feel that that purchase you just made could be connected to it.
so we wanted to come up with that easy solution, a beautiful, easy solution with zady so it could be easy, you could go, you could feel really good about the products you're buying and learn more about them. >> ari? >> you want me to ask a question now? >> you could if you like. >> okay. >> it's up to you. >> i wasn't really ready. that's why there was a long pause. but the question i did want to ask is, even beyond your company, how do you advise consumers to decide the difference between companies that are just trying to be sort of in the look of, you know, con conscious consumerism versus those that have objective proof they're being responsible? >> so we're a part of a larger movement. the movement is called conscious consumption and consumerism. zady likes to align itself with brands like wholefoods, who does take time to show the origins of the purchase. our goal is to take it one step
further with men's wear, women's wear. but it is a larger movement. it goes far beyond us. in order for this to work, we're going to need to partner with brands all around the world who do stand up for these principles and who do align with our mission. >> maxine, i love this concept of conscious consumerism. it's going on. it's much bigger than zady, as you're talking about. some people call it dollar voting. some people call it moral purchasing. i read up on this philosopher who says, no purchasing decision exists that doesn't imply some moral choice. i think a lot of people don't look at it that way. if we look at our money as able to shape our world the way we spend it, where we spend it, then we would look at it differently and we'd spend it differently. >> absolutely. i think we have made that connection with food. we definitely think more about it. i grew up with fast food. that was a normal meal to have. we're definitely a little more conscious of that. even the fast food industry is changing itself so they're more organic choices.
walmart has organic food these days. nothing we would have conceived of five years ago. so customers and consumers are really beginning to catch on to the idea with food. now they're beginning with apparel as well. >> and what you guys are really talking about is sort of a shift in mindset. i mean, like maxine was saying, there is this feeling of you go shopping and you get something cute and you are excited to wear it and, you know, it's like kind of an addiction in a way. so how do you break that mindset? >> well, two-thirds of millennials, according to the curb report, when given two like minded products, are willing to pay a little more for the item that has the social good component. with zady, we're saying you don't have to worry about spending more now because you get more bang for your buck in terms of cost per wear. the items you're wearing will last in your closet for years to come. the goal for us is to always give people something that makes them feel good and socially responsible at the same time. >> and you attack green washing.
some companies fake it and you're pulling the rug out from under them. >> exactly. with our map feature, which goes down to the raw materials, exactly where your product is coming from, from the raw materials to the manufacturing, where the company's headquarters, and if you can turn around and ask those green washing companies those same questions, you're not going to get very clear responses. >> i also think that just the whole idea of fast fashion, of disposable clothing isn't green, right? >> not at all. there's a myth out there that you give your clothing away, and it goes to somebody that, you know, needs it more than you do. that's just not true. there's enough clothing out there to have a whole wardrobe for every single man, woman, and child on this planet. it ends up in the garbage. i think people don't realize that. >> well, i think it is a beautiful concept. thank you for putting it together. zady.com. i hope people will check it out. thank you, both. up next, words of wisdom from abby and beyonce that you must hear before your next meal. >> nice. thank you.
let's make an entrance. let's go against the grain. this way, that way, even up that way. let's measure this, and how-to that. let's save, and then, let's get down to it. let's make your home feel like this, and make you feel like this. let's do this. more saving. more doing. that's the power of the home depot. right now handscraped saratoga hickory, 99¢ a square foot.
just two nights ago i was working home from work surrounded by the usual hustle and bustle of new york city and i like so many other these days was totally engrossed with whatever i was doing on my known not focusing on what was going on around me. if i was i would have noticed everyone was scampering to avoid a huge rat. unfortunately for me and my feet i didn't notice it until its body ran across my toes.
i'm still cringing but talk about a disease-infested reminder of how technology has totally taken over our daily lives. take, for instance, dinner. it used to be a tame family affair centered around an actual conversation. >> you boys have a hard day at school today? >> gee, mom, every day is hard at school. >> the hardest part is waiting for 3:00. >> that might be an extreme example but for many families including the huntsman family meals look more like this. >> here you go. guys, breakfast. guys. phil, hello. >> kid, push your dishes in the dishwasher. >> that's it. everybody, gadgets down now. >> it's not just family dinners. dinner out with a group of friends ends up going like this, the hellos, take a photo then edit them and upload them. checking status and approval between every course and why not check facebook, e-mail texts and, of course, the instagram
dessert picture and the atmosphere, the food, the entire experience were just things you did in between checking your phone. with each passing day technology creeps a little bit more into our daily lives. our phones have become our best friend and for some they've become their significant other. that might sound a bit dramatic but get this a recent study found 9% of smartphone users admitted to using their phone while having sex. seriously? >> how can you -- >> the heat of the moment isn't enough to convince people to unplug. among of 18 to 34 age group that shoots up to 20%. that's one in five. if you've ever been on the other end of that situation get out now. no wonder many of us suffer from anxiety if our phones are lost for a few minutes. we rely on it to do pretty much everything including daily traffics like checking the balance in the break, saying i love you or breaking up or booking travel.
12% carry them out in the shower, 55% while driving and 33% while on a date and beyond that they have become our social crutch. awkward silence, pull out the phone and pretend you have a e-mail or text to check when you don't know many people, not to worry you have your electronic toy to hide in the corner with. it's almost like we've forgotten what it's like to pick up our phones and act with the world. isn't that right, baby. >> you got to enjoy this moment. >> if that's not a wake-up call, i don't know what it is. a device-free hour to live in the moment and listen to what friends and family are saying at the dinner table. above all that would at least let me declare war on all the rats in new york. that does it for "the cycle." keep it here. martin bashir takes over after a quick break. guys, i'm driving. hey, you guys comfortable? it's best-in-class rear legroom. and with a turbo engine that gets 35 hwy mpg.
you know j.d. power ranked passat the most appealing midsize car two years in a row? i bet, uh, dan here wishes somebody found him most appealing two years in a row. ron: it's ron. jc: ron... exactly... vo: right now get the 2013 passat for 0% apr for 60 months with optional down payment match of up to $500. at humana, our medicare agents sit down with you and ask. being active. and being with this guy. [ male announcer ] getting to know you is how we help you choose the humana medicare plan
that works best for you. mi familia. ♪ [ male announcer ] we want to help you achieve your best health, so you can keep doing the things that are important to you. taking care of our customers. taking care of her. and the next thing on our list is bungee jumping. [ male announcer ] helping you -- now that's what's important to us. [ male announcer ] helping you -- life could be hectic. as a working mom of two young boys angie's list saves me a lot of time. after reading all the reviews i know i'm making the right choice. online or on the phone, we help you hire right the first time.
with honest reviews on over 720 local services. keeping up with these two is more than a full time job, and i don't have time for unreliable companies. angie's list definitely saves me time and money. for over 18 years we've helped people take care of the things that matter most. join today. nascar is ab.out excitement but tracking all the action and hearing everything from our marketing partners, the media and millions of fans on social media
can be a challenge. that's why we partnered with hp to build the new nascar fan and media engagement center. hp's technology helps us turn millions of tweets, posts and stories into real-time business insights that help nascar win with our fans. good afternoon, it's thursday, september the 2 ofth. and after ten cruises, 21 hours, it's now time to get down to the real business of government. ♪ >> five days from now. >> the american people don't want the president's health care bill. >> on october 1st. >> and they don't want the government to hut down. >> millions of americans will finally be able to buy affordable health insurance. >> you sound like my colleagues, the dog ate my homework. >> what is it that these republicans are so mad